The aim of this research is to gain new insights in the changing of cooking practices and eating habits as a result of Frankish influence. To reach this aim, this study strives to seek a relation...Show moreThe aim of this research is to gain new insights in the changing of cooking practices and eating habits as a result of Frankish influence. To reach this aim, this study strives to seek a relation between cooking wares and cooking practices, and diet and eating habits. As a result, it aims to provide valuable information regarding the socio-economic, the cultural, and the local and regional perspective of both cooking practices and eating habits during the Middle to Late Byzantine period (ca. 1200-1500 AD). This research shows that there were indeed changes in cooking practices and eating habits during the Late-Byzantine/Frankish period in the Aegean, and these could have been related to each other. The evidence suggests that smaller, thinner, and taller cooking pots appear somewhere around the middle of the 13th century, replacing the previous globular, thicker ones from the Middle Byzantine period. This change could have been the result of a trend during the Late Byzantine/Frankish period towards more watery dishes, cooked in their own juices. The dietary evidence supports this considerable difference in the Byzantine Aegean diet and the Medieval Western diet, primarily at the higher classes of society. Unfortunately, the effects of Christian Orthodox fasting rules on diet and eating habits or Frankish meat consumption are not visible in stable isotope values from multiple sites in Greece. A socio-economic perspective on the ceramic and dietary evidence during this period could indicate a possible Frankish influence on local cooking practices and eating habits. However, it is not with certainty to say that these changes were actual the result of Frankish influence. From a cultural perspective, it appears that the change to different cooking practices and eating habits in Late Byzantine/Frankish times may not only have been the result of the appearance of the Franks into the scene, but also of growing wealth. Furthermore, it is difficult to distinguish different cooking practices between the higher and lower classes in the Byzantine Aegean or the Medieval West, while substantial variations between town and country or between different local environments must have determined food choice and availability to a certain extent. The local and regional perspective also supports the fact that ceramic and dietary distinctions existed between town, country, and other areas. Urban settlements were more likely to be influenced by a Frankish presence than rural settlements. The experimentation indicates that similar production methods were used for both type of cooking wares. In this regard, it seems very plausible that the Franks did not bring their own potters. The Middle Byzantine way of production seems to have persisted after the Frankish conquest, without noticeable morphological changes.Show less
The thesis analyses the extension of the Urartian Empire and focuses on its northern provinces and frontier regions. It demonstrates how far the Urartian state extended to north in Transcaucasia...Show moreThe thesis analyses the extension of the Urartian Empire and focuses on its northern provinces and frontier regions. It demonstrates how far the Urartian state extended to north in Transcaucasia and shows the different degrees of political control exercised by the central imperial authority over the conquered regions. Urartu, like other ancient empires and states, was not a monolithic, contiguous political and territorial formation, and its boundaries were rather fluid and loosely defined than static like the borders of modern nation states. To achieve a better understanding of the archaeology of political control of the Urartian Empire, four categories and further subcategories of the Urartian cultural assemblage are defined that best represent the Urartian political/administrative landscape: architecture (subdivided by major administrative centres, fortresses and tombs), the display inscriptions, metalwork and pottery. By analysing the distribution of Urartian cultural assemblage, different zones are defined within the Urartian political/administrative landscape such as core, province and frontier, in which the central authority exercised its power and control to varying degrees.Show less
